Jump to content

A (rather gentle) Skewering of Malcolm Gladwell


Recommended Posts

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/books/review/Pinker-t.html?em

 

I hate all the fawning attention this guy gets. And people call him a genius...? :hmm

 

I particularly appreciated this: The reasoning in “Outliers,” which consists of cherry-picked anecdotes, post-hoc sophistry and false dichotomies, had me gnawing on my Kindle.

 

Well, the gentle dressing down came by way of Steven Pinker, who, is pretty much a genuine grade-A, capital G genius – so, if I were Malcolm, I wouldn’t take it so hard. Pinker’s books cover some (emphasis on some) similar ground, but with more emphasis on evolutionary psychology, how the mind works, etc.

 

I just finished What the Dog Saw and found it interesting and enjoyable. Gladwell may be a bit overexposed at the moment, but much of the attention is deserved – imo. He’s no Pinker, but his books get people thinking, and that’s always a good thing.

 

I found this essay to be particularly provocative:

 

John Rock's Error

 

What the co-inventor of the Pill didn't know about menstruation can endanger women's health.

 

http://www.gladwell.com/2000/2000_03_10_a_rock.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a cop-out, GON! I won't allow you to get away with this!

 

:lol

 

Please show some mercy, I'm functioning on an hour of sleep :thumbup

 

Anyways, while we're discussing the topic, here's a not so gentle review of Jonathan Safran Foer’s Eating Animals - yikes!

 

He doesn’t have time to mention (Peter)Singer, but he compares himself to Kafka, quotes Derrida (more than once), and mistakes graphic design for profundity. One chapter begins with the boldfaced words “Speechlessness / Influence / Speechlessness / Influence” densely repeated for five whole pages. There are times when you can almost hear Foer thinking: Yes, these arguments have been made dozens of times before, but they’ve never been made in this font.

 

Link - http://thesecondpass.com/?p=3589

 

The entire review is pretty merciless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read this review a couple days ago. It left me wondering less about Gladwell than his editor(s) who clearly blew the spelling of the algebraic term. How can this happen? I know Gladwell (who I had the pleasure of seeing speak a few years back) is merely a writer of clever articles, but doesn't someone fact check him before his books go to press?

 

From a friend who is a vegetarian..(not me)...happy tofurkey day!! Yikes..!!

 

LouieB

Link to post
Share on other sites

New York City editors don't know shit. Down there, it's all about who you blow, who you give blow to and how much you look like Wang Chung.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...